New chief executive to helm Science Centre Board
Ms Tham Mun See, 55, succeeds Dr Lim Tit Meng, who will step down on June 30, Science Centre Singapore said in a statement. PHOTO: COURTESY OF THAM MUN SEE
SINGAPORE – A long-term Ministry of Education (MOE) staff member will become chief executive of the Science Centre Board on July 1 , a step up from her current role as the board's deputy CEO .
In a statement on June 2 , Science Centre Singapore said Ms Tham Mun See, 55, succeeds Dr Lim Tit Meng, who will step down on June 30 'to pursue other interests'.
Dr Lim has helmed the Science Centre Board since 2010. Under his stewardship, the learning of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (Stem) was made accessible to all ages, the statement said.
During his tenure, Science Centre Singapore rolled out a variety of initiatives, including the Centre of Research and Applied Learning in Science , which mentored students conducting science and engineering research projects.
The 65-year-old also kick-started a partnership with SG Enabl e, making it easier for people with disabilities to access various exhibits at the Science Centre.
In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, he led the Science Centre's pivot to live-streaming videos of science demonstrations, which reached about 170,000 students from more than 300 schools.
The statement added that Dr Lim had overseen the development of the new Science Centre, which will be located in the Jurong Lake District , and is expected to open by the end of 2027 .
Expressing his appreciation, Education Minister Desmond Lee said: 'Dr Lim Tit Meng has played a key role in making Science Centre Singapore an important hub for science education in Singapore.
'Through various initiatives, he has brought Stem learning out of classrooms, and inspired students to apply scientific solutions to real-world problems.'
Besides his achievements as CEO, the associate professor at the National University of Singapore's Department of Biological Sciences also held leadership roles in various scientific organisations.
He was president of the Singapore Association for the Advancement of Science from 2011 to 2025 , the Singapore National Academy of Science from 2019 to 2025 , and the Asia Pacific Network of Science and Technology Centres from 2016 to 2024.
Dr Lim also sat on the board of the US Association of Science and Technology Centres from 2013 to 2018 , and expanded the scope of the Science Centre's business arm, which has secured international collaborations with Sarawak in Malaysia and Kazakhstan.
His successor, Ms Tham, has held multiple leadership roles at MOE.
These include executive director of the Academy of Singapore Teachers , as well as principal of Raffles Girls' School and Anderson Secondary School .
On her appointment, Mr Lee said: 'I look forward to working with Ms Tham Mun See on the development of the new Science Centre, to continue to spark curiosity and nurture creativity through Stem education, and inspire future generations of scientists and innovators.'
Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
3 days ago
- Straits Times
Used in Covid-19 shots, mRNA may help rid the body of HIV
The new study describes the use of mRNA as a tool to flush HIV out of its hiding places. PHOTO: UNSPLASH Used in Covid-19 shots, mRNA may help rid the body of HIV NEW YORK - The technology that powered Covid-19 vaccines may also lead scientists to a cure for HIV. Using mRNA, Australian researchers said they were able to trick the virus to come out of hiding, a crucial step in ridding the body of it entirely. The research, published last week in Nature Communications, is still preliminary and so far has been shown to be successful only in a lab. But it suggests that mRNA has potential far beyond its use in vaccines as a means to deliver therapies against stubborn adversaries. Short for messenger RNA, mRNA is a set of instructions for a gene. In the case of Covid-19 vaccines, the instructions were for a piece of the coronavirus. In the new study, they are for molecules key to targeting HIV. Dr Sharon Lewin, director of the Doherty Institute at the University of Melbourne, who led the study, called mRNA a 'miraculous' tool 'to deliver things that you want into places that were not possible before.' Vaccines deploying mRNA instruct the body to produce a fragment of the virus, which then sets off the body's immune response. In the United States, the shots were initially hailed for turning back the pandemic, then viewed by some with suspicion and fear. Some officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, have falsely said that they are highly dangerous and even deadly. Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services sought to limit the vaccine's availability to pregnant women, children and healthy younger adults. The administration also cancelled a nearly US$600 million (S$773.72 million) contract with the drugmaker Moderna to develop an mRNA shot for humans against bird flu. 'The fear right now is not rational,' Dr Lewin said, adding that 'mRNA vaccines have been given to millions of people around the world, so we have a very good understanding of their risks.' The new study describes the use of mRNA as a tool to flush HIV out of its hiding places. Other uses could involve providing proteins missing from those with certain diseases or correcting genetic errors. Dr Frauke Muecksch, a virologist at Heidelberg University in Germany who was not involved in the work, called mRNA a 'promising, absolutely powerful technology.' Although most people may have only heard of mRNA's use in science during the pandemic, scientists have been working with it for more than 20 years, she said. 'I think it's not just therapeutically very powerful, but also for basic science, for research, it opens up a lot of avenues,' she added. Potent antiretroviral drugs can now control HIV, suppressing it to undetectable levels. Still, minute amounts of the virus lie dormant in so-called reservoirs, waiting for an opportunity to resurge. A cure for HIV would involve ferreting out all of this virus and destroying it, a strategy that has been called 'shock and kill.' A significant hurdle is that the virus lies dormant in a particular type of immune cell, called a resting CD4 cell. Because these cells are inactive, they tend to be unresponsive to drugs. The few drugs scientists have previously used to rouse the virus in these cells were not specific to HIV and had unwanted side effects. 'It's fair to say the field's been a little bit stuck,' said Dr Brad Jones, a viral immunologist at Weill Cornell Medicine who was not involved in the latest research. In 2022, Dr Jones and his colleagues found that the immune boost from the mRNA vaccines awakened latent HIV in people living with the virus. (Other research has shown that mRNA vaccines also activated dormant viruses including Epstein Barr.) 'You get just a little bit of a gentle nudge with some of these vaccines, and it's enough to coax some of these latent viruses out so they can be killed,' Dr Jones said. Dr Lewin and her colleagues had for years experimented with other ways to activate HIV, but had no luck in resting cells. Seeing the success of the Covid-19 vaccines, which used lipid nanoparticles – tiny spheres of fat – containing mRNA, her team tested similar particles. They used the particles to deliver two different sets of molecules: Tat, which is adept at switching HIV on, and CRISPR, a tool that can 'edit' genes. The researchers showed that in resting immune cells from people living with HIV, the approach coaxed the virus out of dormancy. 'It's very, very hard to deal with these cells, so I think this really targeting the right population of cells is what makes this paper special,' Dr Muecksch said. It's unclear whether the new approach can successfully awaken all of the dormant HIV in the body, and what side effects it might produce. Dr Lewin said that 'mRNA will almost certainly have some adverse effects, as every drug does, but we will investigate that systematically, as we do for any new drug.' In this case, she said, side effects may be more acceptable to people living with HIV than having to take medications for the rest of their lives. The researchers plan to test the method in HIV-infected animals next, before moving into clinical trials. NYTIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
3 days ago
- Business Times
This isn't how you ‘restore gold standard' science
IN another attempt to concentrate power, President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to 'restore gold standard science' in federal research and policy. It sounds reasonable given the instances of bad or faked science being published, including high-profile papers on Alzheimer's drug development and one misleadingly claiming that hydroxychloroquine would cure Covid-19. In the last decade, scientists themselves have grown concerned about the large number of studies whose promising results couldn't be replicated. However, researchers dedicated to reforming their field say the president's plan isn't a solution. It's a way to give government officials the power to reject evidence they disagree with – without any accountability or transparency. There is already a long history of US policies that ignored scientific evidence, from allowing toxic lead in petrol to decades of failing to act on the known dangers of asbestos and cigarettes. Science alone can't decide policy, but the public and lawmakers need reliable scientific data to decide, for example, which pesticides or food additives to ban, or how to regulate genetically modified crops. Trump's order cites as a flaw in the system the prolonged school closures during the pandemic. Many US schools stayed closed long after those in most European countries had reopened. However, the US policy decision had little to do with science – shoddy or otherwise. It was more about a clash of values and political polarisation, along with a lack of balanced, evidence-based public discussion. He also criticises the National Marine Fisheries Service for basing restrictions on Maine's lobster fishing industry on a worst-case scenario aimed at protecting the endangered right whale. But the public might benefit from knowing such scenarios – unless their likelihood is being exaggerated. Ultimately, the decision comes down to values: Americans might want to act on even a small chance that an industry could drive a species to extinction. The language in the executive order is nearly identical to that used by scientists already working to improve research standards, including reproducibility, communication about errors and uncertainty, and scepticism about assumptions. In recent years, fields with replication problems have made progress towards those goals by requiring more transparency in reporting data and statistical methods. Peers uncovered fraud in the research of Harvard Professor Francesca Gino, who was fired from her tenured position last month. Journals and scientific societies are requiring more disclosure about potential conflicts of interest, and scientists are using a platform called PubPeer to criticise published work, which can lead to corrections and retractions. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up But the president's directive isn't really aimed at improving science. 'The executive order converts principles of good practice into weapons against scientific evidence,' said psychologist Brian Nosek, co-founder of the Centre for Open Science. Deciding what's credible should be a decentralised process, Nosek said, with many people and lines of evidence being presented and different parties challenging each other. He and other experts in science research reform say that even good studies aren't perfect. There's widespread concern the executive order could allow government officials to flag almost anything as not up to their definition of 'gold standard'. Sometimes the best we have are observational studies or models. Nutrition is notoriously hard to study with reproducible experiments, but we still have to decide what to put in school lunches. And there is no default precautionary position where you wait for perfect evidence; inaction can kill people, too. The executive order comes amid drastic federal funding cuts to the National Science Foundation and similar institutions. It's not surprising that many scientists see the order not as a way to improve scientific standards, but as the latest offensive in a war on science. The document begins by blasting the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for discouraging in-person learning during the pandemic even though 'the best available scientific evidence showed children were unlikely to transmit or suffer serious illness or death from the virus'. On the surface, this is backed up by reporting from The New York Times, citing data showing prolonged school closures didn't significantly decrease Covid-19 mortality, and also set many kids back in their education. In his book, An Abundance of Caution, journalist David Zweig makes a case that the relevant scientific data were available in the spring and summer of 2020, and by May many European schools were up and running with no uptick in casualties. In my own reporting back in summer of 2020, I found the problem was more bottom-up than top-down. The data couldn't reassure people that there was zero risk, and some worried that any danger of severe infection was unacceptable – for students or teachers. By summer 2020, the CDC had acknowledged the benefits of in-person education, but the American public was struggling to have a rational debate. It was more a matter of moral outrage over our different values than any disagreement over science. Many factors fed some regrettable policy choices, including social media algorithms that drowned out reasoned fact-based discussion with misinformation and mudslinging. What we didn't need then was more centralised control of science – and it's the last thing we need now. BLOOMBERG
Straits Times
02-06-2025
- Straits Times
New chief executive to helm Science Centre Board
Ms Tham Mun See, 55, succeeds Dr Lim Tit Meng, who will step down on June 30, Science Centre Singapore said in a statement. PHOTO: COURTESY OF THAM MUN SEE SINGAPORE – A long-term Ministry of Education (MOE) staff member will become chief executive of the Science Centre Board on July 1 , a step up from her current role as the board's deputy CEO . In a statement on June 2 , Science Centre Singapore said Ms Tham Mun See, 55, succeeds Dr Lim Tit Meng, who will step down on June 30 'to pursue other interests'. Dr Lim has helmed the Science Centre Board since 2010. Under his stewardship, the learning of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (Stem) was made accessible to all ages, the statement said. During his tenure, Science Centre Singapore rolled out a variety of initiatives, including the Centre of Research and Applied Learning in Science , which mentored students conducting science and engineering research projects. The 65-year-old also kick-started a partnership with SG Enabl e, making it easier for people with disabilities to access various exhibits at the Science Centre. In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, he led the Science Centre's pivot to live-streaming videos of science demonstrations, which reached about 170,000 students from more than 300 schools. The statement added that Dr Lim had overseen the development of the new Science Centre, which will be located in the Jurong Lake District , and is expected to open by the end of 2027 . Expressing his appreciation, Education Minister Desmond Lee said: 'Dr Lim Tit Meng has played a key role in making Science Centre Singapore an important hub for science education in Singapore. 'Through various initiatives, he has brought Stem learning out of classrooms, and inspired students to apply scientific solutions to real-world problems.' Besides his achievements as CEO, the associate professor at the National University of Singapore's Department of Biological Sciences also held leadership roles in various scientific organisations. He was president of the Singapore Association for the Advancement of Science from 2011 to 2025 , the Singapore National Academy of Science from 2019 to 2025 , and the Asia Pacific Network of Science and Technology Centres from 2016 to 2024. Dr Lim also sat on the board of the US Association of Science and Technology Centres from 2013 to 2018 , and expanded the scope of the Science Centre's business arm, which has secured international collaborations with Sarawak in Malaysia and Kazakhstan. His successor, Ms Tham, has held multiple leadership roles at MOE. These include executive director of the Academy of Singapore Teachers , as well as principal of Raffles Girls' School and Anderson Secondary School . On her appointment, Mr Lee said: 'I look forward to working with Ms Tham Mun See on the development of the new Science Centre, to continue to spark curiosity and nurture creativity through Stem education, and inspire future generations of scientists and innovators.' Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
